Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Fri, 18 Jul 2014 12:43:07 -0400 |
Content-Type: | multipart/alternative |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Avri is correct,
There is cross channel static at several levels here. Since the core
issue here (stakeholder voice and stakeholder interests in the Internet
ecosystem (not just ICANN's remit) ) I will write more later.
Tied up in other business at the moment.
To paraphrase the American humorist Mark Twain: "Misunderstood
information can be around the world before accurate information has time
to put its shoes on."
Let's want for a bit,and clear the air. There is more than enough to do
at all levels and more than one "deck where there is a call to deck
hands". Let's get the shoes on first.
Sam L.
On 18/07/2014 10:56 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> It is possible i am misunderstanding, but i think the conversation is
> cross channeled.
>
> In one case the argument seems to be about how hard it is to get the
> NGOs who are all out consumed with their mission on a bare bones (time,
> money) budget to do this too.
>
> In one case the argument seems to that we MUST get them involved because
> it is instrumental for them to be involved.
>
> From my vantage point, I think both are true. Accommodating both
> realities is tough work.
>
> avri
>
> BTW, my working definition of multistakeholderism (m17m) as a reference
> to where i come from in these discussions:
>
> Multistakeholderism (m17m)
>
> The study and practice of forms of participatory democracy that
> allow for all those who have a stake and who have the inclination, to
> participate on equal footing in the deliberation of issues and the
> recommendation of solutions. While final decisions and implementation
> may be assigned to a single stakeholder group, these decision makers are
> always accountable to all of the stakeholders for their decisions and
> the implementations.
>
> Of course the devil is in the details and implementation is really hard.
|
|
|